About your Search

20121109
20121109
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
that we might see tpulg those spots, chris? >> the most interesting one, i guess, is susan rice,s u.n. ambassador was considered one of the frontrunners to be the secretary of state, very popular with president, has enormous regard for her: she was one of his top policy advisers during hit 2008 campaign. this is susan rice that did the five sunday shows a few days after the libya attack in which she put out the story, apparently they claim still these were the cia talking points that this was all a spontaneous protest over the video that went bad, but there's been a lot of contradiction of that. i think she'd have a tough time getting confirmed. she might get confirmed but it would be a real battle and the president has to decide whether he wants to have that battle. somebody else that is clear is desperate for the job is massachusetts senator john kerry who of course played mitt romney in the debate. one of the questions there, i think he would sale through the senate club, on the other hand i'm not so sure that they want to lose a senate seat. they may feel with all the pick ups th
the perhaps more cyberattacks that are maybe something like an armed attack under the u.n. charter conceivably i suppose, even inactive or, though that is debatable at this point to whether we seen anything like that today. i put a few appear that are relevant. computer network attack talking about that encompass different things. computer network exploitation is basically a to infiltrate a computer network for any of the purposes i just described. it may be some of armed attack. maybe it is for criminal activities and you're hoping to be surreptitious about which are doing. babies are espionage and again are hoping to be surreptitious. so i have an example of how these concepts interrelate to one another and how if you're in the business of computer network defense, you're trying to defend networks at your company. if you look at this from a policy perspective for the united states, for example i'm how vulnerable is the united states? how vulnerable is our critical infrastructure, nuclear power plants, things like that. you quickly see that an infiltration into the network might be to steal a
that in the '90s, we had several examples of massive united nations led interventions where the u.n. move in and establish a presence at a governance in iraq and afghanistan, it was u.s. and nato-led. but in the middle east and north africa particularly in these three countries we were discussing, something new is happening. this is the international community learning how to do things different. we are not going back to what we've done in the last 20 years. we're going to do this in a different way. and i think as an international community where learning what that processes. if you on the ground you can see. there's a lot of things going on, a lot of people there but there's a hesitancy about this intervention. and this involvement. that is quite telling. it wasn't there, you know, in the past. >> thank you. >> yes, i'd like to know how -- i'm abigail woodward and the like to know how women's rights are being protected and advanced. and i like to know if the muslim brotherhood is seen as the main impediment to that, and other constitutions are including them? >> let's start perhaps with
relations with israel, the role of the security council and in the city council in the u.n. almost everything important is at stake in this. this is the most critical and most dangerous situation that the administration will be facing in the next year. looking at in the wind while this year is critical we have to realize this isn't all about some misunderstanding or fixable problem with iran not to getting about its civil nuclear program or even its nuclear weapons program colliding with the international community. these are all manifestations of the long term confrontation that we and the rest of the region has with iran at least since the 1970's and this confrontation will go on regardless of whether we get a nuclear deal or have a strike to prevent iran from moving to that nuclear weapons capability. we are going to have to deal with this problem over the longer term just as we have the last 30 years because it flows from kuran's view of its role in the region and the inconsistency of the view with the view of the other countries in the region, our values and our role both in t
, the role of the security council, and our role in the security council in the u.n. system. almost everything that's important is at stake with this. this is the most critical and most dangerous situation that the administration will be facing in the next year. looking at it, though, and while this year is critical, as den sis said, we have to realize this is not all about some misunderstanding or some fixable problem with iran not getting it about itself civil nuclear program or colliding with the international community. these are all manifestations of the long term confrontation that we, and the rest of the west and the region had with iran as least since the 1970s. this will go on, regardless of whether we get a nuclear deal or we have a strike to prevent iran from moving to the nuclear weapons capability. we're going to have to deal with this problem over the long term just as we have over the last 30 years because it flows from iran's view of its role in the region and inconsistency of that view with the view of the other countries in the region, our values, and our role, bot
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)